Construction and Building Materials 30 (2012) 117–124

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Indirect performance comparison for styrene–butadiene–styrene polymer

and fatty amine anti-strip modified asphalt mixtures
Erol Iskender a,⇑, Atakan Aksoy b, Halit Ozen c
a
Karadeniz Technical University, Of Faculty of Technology, Civil Engineering Department, 61830 Trabzon, Turkey
b
Avrasya University, Engineering and Architectural Faculty, Civil Engineering Department, 61010 Trabzon, Turkey
c
Florida International University, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, College of Engineering and Computing, Miami, FL, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Rutting and moisture damage are two important distress mechanisms for asphalt mixtures. The aim of
Received 28 August 2011 this study is to analyze effects of SBS polymer and fatty amine anti-stripping agent additives for asphalt
Received in revised form 14 October 2011 mixtures. Indirect performance comparison was evaluated with such additives. SBS and amine agents
Accepted 24 November 2011
were compared with indirect effects in context with deformation and moisture resistance. Three types
Available online 29 December 2011
of moisture conditioning were selected. Regimes were based on water immersion, freeze–thaw cycles
and superposition of these. Repeated creep tests (RCTs) and indirect tensile (ITT) tests were applied. In
Keywords:
view of RCT polymer showed higher resistance to rutting based on permanent deformations than the con-
Asphalt mixtures
SBS polymer
trol and amine modified mixtures. Lower deformations were calculated with SBS than the others accord-
Anti-stripping agent ing to the RCT. For high temperature and combined moisture effects based on water saturation and
Fatty amine freeze–thaw cycle rutting and moisture problem have been being a serious problem for both control
Repeated creep and SBS-anti stripping agent modified mixtures. In this context great importance must be given in design
Resilient modulus and quality control. Proportional moisture damage evaluation was found as a confliction. With the
Indirect tension test increasing of rise period lower resilient modulus (RM) were obtained with all control and modified mix-
Moisture damage tures in ITT. Selected moisture conditioning methods reveal observable level of damage with the RM test
(ASTM D4123) with the selected parameters. Both amine and SBS modified mixtures gives higher RM
hence load spreading capacity increases with both SBS and anti-strips.
Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Environmental factors such as temperature, air, and water can
have a profound effect on the durability of asphalt mixtures. In
mild climatic conditions where good-quality aggregates and
asphalt cement are available, the major contribution to the deteri-
oration may be traffic loading, and the resultant distress manifests
as fatigue cracking, rutting (permanent deformation), and raveling.
However, when a severe climate is in question, these stresses
increase with poor materials, under inadequate control, with traffic
as well as with water which are key elements in the degradation of
asphalt concrete pavements. Water causes loss of adhesion at the
bitumen–aggregate interface. This premature failure of adhesion
is commonly referred to as stripping in asphalt concrete pave-
ments [1].
Moisture damage or stripping is an asphalt pavement distress
that is generally recognized as the loss of the bond between the
asphalt binder and the aggregate. Several pavement distresses that
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 462 7717250; fax: +90 462 7717251.
E-mail addresses: eroliskender@gmail.com (E. Iskender), aaksoygmf@hotmail.
com (A. Aksoy), ozenh@fiu.edu (H. Ozen).
can include stripping as the underlying cause are rutting, cracking,
raveling, flushing, and bleeding. Stripping can progress from either
the top or bottom of hot mix pavement layer. The common cause in
all cases of stripping is the presence of water. The potential for a
hot mix asphalt pavement to incur moisture damage can be con-
trolled or reduced through material selection, mixture designs that
include a high asphalt film thickness, additives, proper pavement
design, construction, compaction, and drainage [2,3].
Permanent deformation and moisture damage (i.e., rutting and
stripping) are two predominant hot-mix asphalt (HMA) distresses.
Rutting can be caused by many factors, including stripping, which
result in reduced HMA shear strength. Hot-mix asphalt stripping
evaluation is a source of significant industry discussion and debate.
Transportation agencies use a number of methods to evaluate
stripping, with many methods customized depending on local con-
cerns and environmental conditions [4].
Moisture damage of asphalt mixes, better known as stripping, is
a major distress affecting pavement performance. AASHTO T283
has historically been used to detect moisture susceptible pave-
ments through the determination of a tensile strength ratio
(TSR). Results from AASHTO T283 have been inconsistent. As a
result there has been increased interest in finding an alternative

0950-0618/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.11.027
118 E. Iskender et al. / Construction and Building Materials 30 (2012) 117–124

test. Preliminary indications reveal that loaded wheel rut testers, Table 2
such as the Asphalt Pavement Analyzer (APA) have the potential Aggregate specific gravities (g/cm3).

to detect moisture susceptible mixtures. To date, no standard test Grain-size fraction Apparent specific gravity Bulk specific gravity
methodology has been developed [5]. Coarse aggregate 2.894 2.832
Stripping can result include rutting and cracking due to shear Fine Aggregate 2.889 2.751
forces. Although the phenomenon of stripping has been acknowl- Filler aggregate 2.910 –
edged for over 50 years, being able to predict the moisture suscep- Aggregate mixture 2.893 2.803

tibility of aggregates has not been adequately solved. Part of the

attention of the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) was
focused on determining a test method to evaluate the moisture Table 3
damage potential of aggregates. This research was not completely The results of tests performed on asphalt cement (AC 50–70).

successful. The recommendations from SHRP were to continue Properties Test method Unit Value
using AASHTO T283, ‘‘Resistance of Compacted Bituminous Mix- Specific gravity (25 °C) ASTM D-70 g/cm3 1.019
ture to Moisture Induced Damage.’’ Besides the occasional inability Softening point (°C) ASTM D36–76 °C 52
of AASHTO T283 to accurately determine moisture susceptibility, Flash point (Cleveland) ASTM D-92 °C 210
the test is also time intensive (3–4 days to complete). Thus, a test Penetration (25 °C) ASTM D-5 0.1 mm 67
Ductility (25 °C) ASTM D-113 cm 100+
method that would accurately predict stripping potential and take
hours rather than days to complete would be attractive to highway
agencies and contractors [5].
Stripping may occur from separation of the asphalt film and 100
aggregate surface or from emulsification of the asphalt. This phe- 90
nomenon has been recognized since 1938. A number of tests are
80

Percentage Passing, %
used to evaluate moisture susceptibility of bituminous mixtures.
In addition to AASHTO T283, these tests include the following: 70
NCHRP Report 192 (Lottman), Modified Lottman, NCHRP Report 60
274 (Tunnicliff and Root), ASTM D 1075-81 (AASHTO T 165-82), 50
ASTM D 1664-80 (AASHTO T 182-82), and MIL-STD-620
40
Immersion–Compression Test. Some of these tests are based on sub-
jective evaluation of results. In general, the tests have a tenuous cor- 30
relation with actual field performance [6]. 20
To alleviate or to control the deformations due to water damage, 10
various researches were performed leading to the utilization of
0
anti-stripping additives. Anti-stripping additives are used to 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00
increase physico-chemical bond between the bitumen and aggre-
Sieve Size, mm
gate and to improve wetting by lowering the surface tension of
the bitumen. The additives that are used in practice or tested in Fig. 1. Aggregate distribution on gradation chart.
the laboratory include: (i) traditional liquid additives, (ii) metal
ion surfactants, (iii) hydrated lime and quick lime, (iv) silane cou- One conventional bitumen and two different types modified bitumen was pre-
pling agents, and (v) silicone. Among them, hydrated lime and pared. Styrene–butadiene–styrene elastomeric polymer (SBS) and fatty amine agent
(AS) were used for modification of the selected asphalt mixtures.
quicklime are the most commonly used solid type anti-stripping
SBS concentration was chosen as 5% by weight of AC. It was stated that a signif-
agents [1]. icant improvement in the properties of base bitumen was observed when the SBS
The main goal of this research is to investigate rutting and content was increased from 2% to 6% by weight [7]. The base bitumen was heated
moisture damage problems in asphalt mixtures. Anti-stripping to fluid condition (180 °C) temperature and the powder form SBS was then added
fatty amine additive (AS) and styrene–butadiene–styrene polymer slowly to the base bitumen. The mixing process continued for 2 h at constant
temperature.
(SBS) was used. Repeated creep tests and indirect tension tests
AS is a liquid additive, specially designed for hot-mixed asphalt where good
were realized for different moisture conditioning. Proportional heat stability is required. The dosage of AS depends on the type of bitumen and
evaluation for stripping was studied and permanent deformation. aggregate used. Normally between 0.2% and 0.5% is added to the binder [8]. On
the other hand AS concentration was chosen as 0.4% by weight of bitumen and
added asphalt binder. The conventional properties of AS modifier were presented
2. Materials in Table 4.
Wearing coarse design was realized with ASTM D1559 Marshall Method.
Test materials and experimental procedures in this study were following. Optimal mixture parameters were presented in Table 5 according to the Marshall
Aggregate combination and asphalt cement (AC) as bitumen were used. Aggregate test.
combination was obtained from the Sularbasi rock quarry near Araklı, Trabzon, Tur- Properties of the used samples in experimental stages were illustrated in Tables
key. Several properties of coarse and fine aggregates were exhibited in Tables 1 and 6–8. Tables 6–8 show control samples, SBS and AS modified samples respectively.
2. Fifty to seventy penetration grade AC was used. Bitumen test results were pre-
sented in Table 3. Gradation curve are represented in Fig. 1.

Table 4
Table 1 Conventional properties of AS modifier [8].
Engineering properties of the used aggregate.
Properties Value
Properties Test method Value
Appearance at 20 °C Brown, viscous liquid
L.A. Abrasion (%) ASTM C-131 9.6 Odor Amine-like
Flakiness (%) BS 812 (part 105) 14.7 Density at 20 °C, kg/m3 980
Stripping resistance (%) ASTM D-1664 30–35 Pour point, °C <0
Water absorption (%) ASTM C-127 0.85 Flash point, °C >218 °C
Soundness in NaSO4 (%) ASTM C-88 4.06 Viscosity, dynamic at 20 °C 505 mPa s
Polished stone value BS 812 (part 114) 0.60 pH 11 at 5% solution
Plasticity index for sandy aggregate TS 1900 Non-plastic Water solubility Emulsifiable
 E. Iskender et al. / Construction and Building Materials 30 (2012) 117–124 119

Table 5 Table 8
Marshall design test results. Properties of the AS modified samples.

Design parameters Values Board in Turkey Sample Average Practical Max. T. Air VMA VFA
number height density (g/ density (g/ voids (%) (%)
Min. Max.
(mm) cm3) cm3) (%)
Bulk specific gravity, Gmb 2.510 – –
1 60.1 2.528 2.618 3.4 14.2 75.9
Marshall stability (kg) 1530 900 –
2 61.3 2.511 2.618 4.1 14.8 72.5
Air voids, Pa (%) 4 3 5
3 60.5 2.511 2.618 4.1 14.8 72.4
Void filled with asphalt, Vf (%) 72 75 85
4 60.4 2.518 2.618 3.8 14.6 73.7
Flow, F (1/100 in.) 3.2 2 4
5 61.2 2.514 2.618 3.9 14.7 73.1
Filler/bitumen 1.17 – 1.5
6 60.6 2.525 2.618 3.6 14.3 75.2
Asphalt cement, Wa 5.15
7 60.4 2.516 2.618 3.9 14.6 73.4
8 61.0 2.504 2.618 4.4 15.0 71.1
9 61.2 2.508 2.618 4.2 14.9 71.8
10 61.6 2.507 2.618 4.2 14.9 71.7
Table 6 11 61.1 2.504 2.618 4.4 15.1 71.0
Properties of the control samples. 12 60.6 2.515 2.618 3.9 14.7 73.2
13 60.8 2.516 2.618 3.9 14.6 73.4
Sample Average Practical Max. T. Air VMA VFA 14 60.8 2.502 2.618 4.4 15.1 70.6
number height (mm) density density voids (%) (%) 15 60.7 2.521 2.618 3.7 14.5 74.4
(g/cm3) (g/cm3) (%) 16 60.9 2.511 2.618 4.1 14.8 72.3
1 59.9 2.523 2.618 3.6 14.4 74.9
2 59.9 2.523 2.618 3.6 14.4 74.9
3 60.1 2.519 2.618 3.8 14.6 73.9
4 60.7 2.518 2.618 3.8 14.6 73.8
5 61.8 2.533 2.618 3.2 14.1 76.9
6 60.8 2.528 2.618 3.4 14.2 75.9 Actuator
7 60.6 2.530 2.618 3.4 14.2 76.3
8 61.1 2.517 2.618 3.9 14.6 73.6
9 60.0 2.528 2.618 3.4 14.2 75.9
10 60.6 2.523 2.618 3.6 14.4 74.8
11 60.1 2.526 2.618 3.5 14.3 75.5
12 60.3 2.530 2.618 3.4 14.2 76.3
13 60.3 2.528 2.618 3.4 14.2 76.0
14 59.3 2.525 2.618 3.5 14.3 75.3
15 60.3 2.530 2.618 3.4 14.2 76.2
16 59.3 2.529 2.618 3.4 14.2 76.1

Load cell

Table 7
Properties of the SBS modified samples.

Sample Average Practical Max. T. Air VMA VFA Fig. 2. Test frame in the NAT tester [9].
number height (mm) density density voids (%) (%)
(g/cm3) (g/cm3) (%)
1 61.2 2.503 2.618 4.4 15.1 70.9 processes were also repeated as three steps. At the last condition-
2 60.9 2.506 2.618 4.3 15.0 71.4 ing first and second damage models were come together and third
3 61.4 2.502 2.618 4.4 15.1 70.7 conditioning model was developed. Both control and two different
4 61.2 2.504 2.618 4.4 15.0 71.1
modified mixture samples were used. Repeated creep test and
5 60.5 2.516 2.618 3.9 14.6 73.4
6 61.7 2.503 2.618 4.4 15.1 70.9 indirect tension test were applied both conditioned and uncondi-
7 60.8 2.520 2.618 3.7 14.5 74.3 tioned samples and control and modified mixtures.
8 61.3 2.508 2.618 4.2 14.9 71.8
9 61.5 2.507 2.618 4.2 14.9 71.7
3.1. Repeated creep test
10 61.6 2.510 2.618 4.1 14.8 72.3
11 61.2 2.505 2.618 4.3 15.0 71.2
12 61.0 2.511 2.618 4.1 14.8 72.3 Repeated creep tests (RCTs) has been used to determine per-
13 60.4 2.516 2.618 3.9 14.6 73.4 manent deformation of asphalt mixtures. RCT were applied to
14 62.3 2.512 2.618 4.0 14.8 72.6 control and modified mixture samples. RCT tests were studied
15 60.4 2.510 2.618 4.1 14.8 72.3
in Nottingham Asphalt Tester (NAT). Test frame in NAT tester
16 62.2 2.512 2.618 4.1 14.8 72.6
was illustrated in Fig. 2. Repeated creep test parameters were
summarized in Table 9.

3. Test methods 3.2. Indirect tension test

In this research SBS and AS modified asphalt mixtures were
evaluated with repeated creep test and indirect tension tests. Tests
were done identical samples for both and modified ones. Control
and conditioned samples were tested with the same parameters.
Three different types of moisture conditioning systems were
applied. In the first conditioning conditioned samples were kept
in 60 °C water for 72 h. In the second system samples were located
in 15 °C freezer for 72 h with water bath and after samples were
kept in water at room temperature. Plastic bags were used. These
The resilient modulus is a non-destructive test that can be used
to evaluate the relative quality of materials. The test can be used to
study effects of temperature and load rate. This test method covers
testing laboratory prepared samples of bituminous mixtures to
determine the resilient modulus using the repeated-load indirect
tension test. The procedure prescribes the range of temperatures,
loads, loading frequencies, and load durations [10].
Indirect tensile tests were applied for all sample types. Temper-
ature in the experiments was used as 40 °C. Poisson ratio was
120 E. Iskender et al. / Construction and Building Materials 30 (2012) 117–124

Table 9 to 780 N (100 kPa) starting load. Average 1100 N (138 kPa) load
Repeated creep test parameters. was put into practice during the duration of test. Loads and perma-
Test parameters Values nent deformations were saved at least 20 h. For high temperature
Temperature 40 °C (60 °C) repeated creep test failed because of the sample destruc-
Conditioning stress 10 kPa tion. The type of asphalt modifier does significantly affect the per-
Conditioning stress time 1 min manent deformation performance. SBS mixtures show the highest
Conditioning stress rest time 1 min resistance to the permanent deformation and harmonious results
Test stress 100 kPa
Loading period 1000 ms
are concern with the repeated creep tests [11].
Time loaded 500 ms Numerous investigations have been carried out on incorporating
Time unloaded 500 ms polymer modified bitumen to improve the performance of bitumi-
Pulse number 64,800 (18 h) nous composites. This included bitumen modified with SBS or EVA
Resting time 15 min
or SBR (natural and ground tyer rubber) in various concentrations.
Most of the results obtained from laboratory and full-scale trials
demonstrate to varying extents an improvement in the perfor-
Table 10 mance of these modified bituminous mixes in terms of increased
Used sample numbers for repeated creep and indirect tension test.
resistance to permanent deformation, improvement in fatigue life,
Temperature: 40 °C Unconditioned Cond. 1 Cond. 2 Cond. 3 improved durability and resistance to moisture damage [12,13].
Repeated creep test The repeated load axial (RLA) test was used to measure the
SBS modified samples 1–2 3–4 5–6 7–8 resistance to permanent deformation (rutting) of the asphalt con-
AS modified samples 1–2 3–4 5–6 7–8 crete field cores. This is a basic type of dynamic creep test which
Control samples 1–2 3–4 5–6 7–8
provides a relationship between axial strain and the number of
Indirect tension test load pulses. Test conditions adopted for the RLA test were: temper-
SBS modified samples 9–10 11–12 13–14 15–16
ature 40 °C; conditioning stress 10 kPa; conditioning period
AS modified samples 9–10 11–12 13–14 15–16
Control samples 9–10 11–12 13–14 15–16 10 min; test stress 100 kPa; load cycle stress duration 1 s and rest
period 1 s; and test duration 3600 load cycles. Polymer (styrene)
modified mixtures showed higher performance than the conven-
selected as 0.35 value. Pulse and conditioning period were de- tional mixtures and increased load spread ability for field core
signed as 2000 ms. Applied load was 1000 N. Rise times are 40– samples [14]. In this research laboratory produced samples were
60–80 ms rise times. used in all creep tests. At high temperatures logically trends were
Summarize chart of study and used sample numbers in re- obtained repeated creep tests.
peated creep and indirect tension test were given in Table 10. Effects of SBS and SBR modification on performance were stud-
ied. The pre-manufactured binders and SBS-modified binders with
4. Test results and discussions 4–5% polymer content had the best rutting resistance. SBS modifi-
cation improved the rutting resistance dramatically, especially for
4.1. Repeated creep test the A5 binder. The SBR modification also improved the rutting
resistance when compared to the straight binders, except for one
Strength of the bituminous mixtures to the plastic deformation case. Mixtures with the pre-manufactured binders, PM1 and
may be determined with the repeated creep test. Test equipment is PM2, exhibited the best low temperature cracking performance
the same as the static creep test but repeated load are carried out on the basis of fracture temperatures. In general, the polymer mod-
differently. Efficiency of some selected chemical additives are ification improved the low temperature cracking resistance
especially evaluated with the repeated creep test also rutting slightly. According to the test results, the polymer modification im-
investigation of mixtures are done [11]. Various permanent defor- proved the pavement performance, both rutting resistance and low
mation values for some test times were summarized in Table 11. temperature cracking resistance, for all base binders for the se-
Creep curves of all mixtures at 40 °C test temperature were lected combinations. This indicates that the polymer modification
given in Fig. 3 for repeated creep tests. is beneficial if done properly [15]. In our research pre-modified
Creep curves for mixtures in terms of average meaning as illus- mixtures (PMs) showed higher rutting resistance than the labora-
trated in Figs. 4–8. tory modified mixtures. The efficiency of SBS additive was clearly
The highest creep deformations were obtained with third mois- observed like other researches [16–18].
ture conditioning for control, SBS and AS mixtures. At the end of Methods of treatment to reduce moisture damage also include
64,730 pulses in repeated creep test process SBS modified mixtures the utilization of polymer modified bitumen (PMB). Polymer is a
display activity for destructed mixtures but however AS modified derived word meaning many parts. Polymers are made up of many
mixtures remain incapable for highest moisture damage. With re- smaller chemicals (monomers) joint together end-on-end. The
gard to this conclusion AS modified mixtures cannot verify enough physical and chemical properties of a polymer depend on the nat-
resistance to the third moisture conditioning especially in terms of ure of the individual molecular units, the number of them in each
rutting. SBS modified mixtures were found effectual in respect to polymer chain and their combination with other molecular types.
rutting. In Fig. 8 the un-recovery creep deformations or flow rut- Two basic types of polymers are used in modified bitumen of road
ting values were presented for 64,730 pulses. With the increasing applications: (i) elastomers and (ii) plastomers. SBS block copoly-
of moisture effect SBS protects own structural integrity and main- mers are classified as elastomers that increase the elasticity of
tains its efficiency but in recognition of rutting anti-stripping agent bitumen and they are probably the most appropriate polymers
creep portions gain onto the control mixtures. Tertiary creep for bitumen modification. Although low temperature flexibility is
region did not come into existence for all types of mixtures. SBS increased, some authors claim that a decrease in strength and
mixtures propound synchronize mixtures because intervals be- resistance to penetration is observed at higher temperatures.
tween identical SBS mixtures seems more homogenous. This is Although, the utilization of PMBs for controlling the moisture dam-
an important result in view of quality control. age is limited, there is evidence that some polymers can act as anti-
Experiments in another study were realized at 25 and 40 °C test stripping agents. Polymer modified systems could accommodate
temperatures during 1000 ms pulse period. Samples were exposed more damage prior to failure that of unmodified systems. They
 E. Iskender et al. / Construction and Building Materials 30 (2012) 117–124 121

Table 11
Permanent deformation values for some test times at 40 °C temperatures.
6
Number of pulses Sample numbers and permanent deformation values: 10 in./in.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Control mixtures 1 126 211 459 231 871 273 334 448
1000 2289 3059 4495 2880 5304 3833 3837 5511
10,000 3427 4006 5358 3692 6215 4767 4763 6696
19,952 3726 4257 5587 3918 6469 5017 5044 7008
30,045 3899 4382 5716 4096 6622 5156 5199 7179
39,810 4044 4460 5806 4195 6732 5256 5296 7302
50,118 4140 4537 5896 4264 6831 5365 5383 7388
64,730 4227 4605 5965 4373 6928 5435 5481 7531
SBS modified mixtures 1 158 153 142 123 292 238 513 161
1000 1910 1598 2192 1594 2693 2390 4107 2021
10,000 2654 2221 3641 2388 3418 3155 5274 2796
19,952 2864 2413 4030 2710 3617 3388 5482 2990
30,045 2974 2509 4191 2814 3756 3515 5615 3123
39,810 3065 2557 4380 2881 3835 3583 5670 3205
50,118 3145 2625 4464 2890 3865 3661 5747 3267
64,730 3205 2682 4502 2929 3944 3699 5813 3350
AS modified mixtures 1 164 152 183 279 212 276 350 376
1000 1160 1352 2719 3451 2636 3347 5118 3708
10,000 1768 2155 3616 4422 3452 4264 6657 4527
19,952 2194 2428 3842 4701 3658 4553 7001 4756
30,045 2348 2523 3997 4836 3792 4733 7241 4860
39,810 2503 2664 4120 4942 3896 4873 7355 4964
50,118 2599 2749 4202 5057 3948 4984 7429 5027
64,730 2696 2825 4315 5163 4051 5104 7544 5141

Control mixtures SBS modified mixtures AS modified mixtures

8000 8000 8000
1 3 5 7
Permanent deformation: 10-6 in/in

Permanent deformation: 10-6 in/in

2 4 6 8 Permanent deformation: 10-6 in/in

7000 7000 7000

6000 6000 6000

5000 5000 5000

4000 4000 4000

3000 3000 3000

2000 1 3 5 7 2000 2000 1 3 5 7

2 4 6 8
2 4 6 8
1000 1000 1000
0 20000 40000 60000 0 20000 40000 60000 0 20000 40000 60000
Number of pulses Number of pulses Number of pulses

Fig. 3. Repeated creep curves for all mixture types.

7000 7000
Control SBS AS Control SBS AS
Permanent deformation: 10-6 in/in
Permanent deformation: 10-6 in/in

6000 6000

5000 5000

4000 4000

3000 3000

2000 2000

1000 1000
0 20000 40000 60000 0 20000 40000 60000
Number of pulses Number of pulses

Fig. 4. Average repeated creep curves for unconditioned mixtures. Fig. 5. Average repeated creep curves for conditioning 1 type.
122 E. Iskender et al. / Construction and Building Materials 30 (2012) 117–124

7000 7000
Permanent deformation: 10-6 in/in Control SBS AS

Permanent Deform.: 10-6 in/in

6000 6000

5000
5000

4000
4000
3000
3000
2000
2000
Control SBS AS 1000
1000
0 20000 40000 60000 0
Uncond. Cond. 1 Cond. 2 Cond. 3
Number of pulses
Conditioning types
Fig. 6. Average repeated creep curves for conditioning 2 type.
Fig. 8. Permanent deformation values so far as control and conditioning mixtures.

7000
4.2. Indirect tension test
Permanent deformation: 10-6 in/in

6000
Indirect tension tests were applied 40 ms–60 ms–80 ms rise
5000 times. Test results were summarized in Table 12. With the increas-
ing of rise time or else loading duration resilient modulus values
4000 decreased. In addition to this modulus values decreased with the
moisture conditioning. PE and AS mixtures gave higher modulus
3000 than the control mixtures for both control, first, second and third
conditioning stages for all rise times. It was concluded that for ulti-
2000 mate loading conditions (80 ms rise time and conditioning 3) both
Control SBS AS additives gives almost the same modulus values like control mix-
1000 tures. As a result modified mixtures can show resemble results
0 20000 40000 60000
with control mixtures in view of ability of load spreading.
Number of pulses Resilient modulus values were illustrated in Fig. 9 according to
Fig. 7. Average repeated creep curves for conditioning 3 type. the control and conditioning mixtures and also presented in Fig. 10
mixture type.
With the increasing of rise period lower resilient modulus were
indicated that mixtures containing PMB strongly exhibited less obtained with all control and modified mixtures. Selected moisture
moisture damage [19–21]. conditioning methods reveal observable level of damage with the

Table 12
Resilient modulus values for control and modified mixtures at 40 °C (MPa).

Cond. types SBS mod. AS mod. Control

40 ms 60 ms 80 ms 40 ms 60 ms 80 ms 40 ms 60 ms 80 ms
Uncond.
9A 4268 3420 2966 3049 2741 2483 2492 1942 1634
9B 3713 2699 2212 2853 2533 2276 2490 1786 1596
10A 3112 2669 2275 3208 2704 2406 2047 1617 1364
10B 4136 3197 2784 3243 2848 2522 1939 1498 1270
Avrg. 3807 2996 2559 3088 2707 2422 2242 1711 1466
Cond. 1
11A 2328 1886 1588 3164 2631 2342 1951 1587 1351
11B 2328 1791 1463 3187 2660 2334 1819 1418 1205
12A 2540 2049 1756 1837 1426 1115 2289 1790 1543
12B 2333 1920 1609 1639 1327 1116 1883 1530 1320
Avrg. 2382 1912 1604 2457 2011 1727 1986 1581 1355
Cond. 2
13A 2752 2547 2166 2433 2005 1623 1976 1535 1313
13B 2683 2189 1895 2377 2062 1719 2136 1688 1456
14A 2327 1821 1550 2123 1833 1688 2371 1763 1454
14B 2376 1713 1463 2085 1857 1765 2224 1699 1424
Avrg. 2534 2067 1769 2255 1939 1699 2177 1671 1412
Cond. 3
15A 2081 1511 1249 2020 1742 1427 1805 1427 1222
15B 1950 1381 1121 1944 1623 1351 1747 1330 1325
16A 2194 1673 1387 1791 1433 1151 1792 1539 1224
16B 2190 1562 1318 1968 1438 1177 1813 1472 1129
Avrg. 2104 1532 1269 1931 1559 1277 1789 1442 1225
 E. Iskender et al. / Construction and Building Materials 30 (2012) 117–124 123

4000 4000 4000

40ms Control 60ms Control 80ms Control
3500 SBS 3500 SBS 3500 SBS
Resilient modulus: MPa

Resilient modulus: MPa

Resilient modulus: MPa

AS AS AS
3000 3000 3000

2500 2500 2500

2000 2000 2000

1500 1500 1500

1000 1000 1000

Uncond. Cond. 1 Cond. 2 Cond. 3 Uncond. Cond. 1 Cond. 2 Cond. 3 Uncond. Cond. 1 Cond. 2 Cond. 3
Conditioning type Conditioning type Conditioning type

Fig. 9. Average resilient modulus values according to conditioning type.

4000 4000 4000

Uncond. 40ms Uncond. 60ms Uncond. 80ms
Cond.1 Cond. 1 Cond. 1
3500 3500 3500
Cond. 2 Cond. 2 Cond. 2
Resilient modulus: MPa
Resilient modulus: MPa

Resilient modulus: MPa

Cond. 3 Cond. 3 Cond. 3
3000 3000 3000

2500 2500 2500

2000 2000 2000

1500 1500 1500

1000 1000 1000

Cont. SBS AS Cont. SBS AS Cont. SBS AS
Mixture type Mixture type Mixture type

Fig. 10. Average resilient modulus values according to mixture type.

resilient modulus test (ASTM D4123) with the selected test param- Table 13
eters. Both amine modified mixtures and SBS polymer modified Resilient modulus ratios.
mixtures gives higher modulus values. As a result of this load
Mix types Ratio types Ratio values
spreading capacity increases with both SBS and anti-strips. In the
third conditioning scheme control and modified mixtures put in 40 ms 60 ms 80 ms

similar performance in context with modulus. As far as these SBS mod. Cond. 1/uncond. 0.63 0.64 0.63
results are concerned third conditioning was found as a high dam- Cond. 2/uncond. 0.67 0.69 0.69
Cond. 3/uncond. 0.55 0.51 0.50
age level. In this regard higher permanent deformation resistance
was found with resilient modulus concept with load spreading. AS mod. Cond. 1/uncond. 0.80 0.74 0.71
Cond. 2/uncond. 0.73 0.72 0.70
Moisture damage problem was studied with the proportional ap-
Cond. 3/uncond. 0.63 0.58 0.53
proach. Resilient modulus ratios were calculated and given in Table
Cont. Cond. 1/uncond. 0.89 0.92 0.92
13. It was known that destructed value is divided to un-destructed
Cond. 2/uncond. 0.97 0.98 0.96
control value and these ratios may be used for interrogation of strip- Cond. 3/uncond. 0.80 0.84 0.84
ping propensity. So far as the relative evaluation of ratios controver-
sial results were found. Higher ratios were concerned with control
mixtures than the modified mixtures. Ratio approach conflicts with mixes, however greater resistance to moisture damage with rub-
the other mechanical tests. Relative efficiency of different type of ber-polymer modified binder as compared to unmodified binder
additives was found as controversial based on resilient ratios. mixes. It could be noted that temperature significantly affects the
The relative performance of different additives seems to be dif- performance of the hot mix asphalt. Statistical analysis of tensile
ferent. The choice for any field application should therefore be strength ratio and resilient modulus ratio results show there are
made on the basis of field trials or at least by conducting a simula- significant different for mix with the addition of hydrated lime
tion model study to assess their relative performance because long and demonstrates a higher potential for stripping resistance [24].
term effectiveness of the amino additives is still controversial [22].
Misleading results using tensile strength ratio for fatty amine 5. Conclusions
mixed asphalt pavements were founded in terms of stripping [23].
It was shown that rubber-polymer modified binder mixes were This research was performed for evaluating stripping and rutting
found to exhibit better resistance to moisture damage compared to problem in asphalt mixtures with the addition of anti-stripping
unmodified binder mixes. The results also showed that the addi- agent and styrene–butadiene–styrene polymer. These consider-
tion of hydrated lime as anti-stripping additive is effective in all ations can be drawn from this study.
124 E. Iskender et al. / Construction and Building Materials 30 (2012) 117–124
 Variation between SBS identical samples was shown more
homogenous for control and conditioned samples. SBS mixtures
propound synchronize mixtures. This is important in view of
quality control.
 According to the repeated creep test with the increasing of
moisture effect SBS mixture protects own structural integrity
and maintains its efficiency but in recognition of rutting AS
creep portions gain onto the control mixtures.
 All moisture conditioning systems revealed an observable level
of damage. Especially third conditioning was found an ultimate
destruction for the mixtures. AS modified mixtures cannot verify
enough resistance to the third moisture conditioning especially
in terms of rutting with the selected ratio and aggregate type.
 With the increasing of rise period lower resilient modulus were
obtained with all control and modified mixtures. Evaluation of
the rise period effects on the control and conditioned mixtures
with the resilient modulus concept have been being possible in
context with the stripping evaluation.
 Selected moisture conditioning methods reveal observable level
of damage with the resilient modulus test (ASTM D4123) with
the selected test parameters.
 Load spreading capacity increases with both SBS and AS. In the
third conditioning scheme control and modified mixtures put
in similar performance in context with resilient modulus. As far
as these results are concerned third conditioning was found as
a high damage level. In this regard higher permanent deforma-
tion resistance was found with resilient modulus concept with
load spreading.
 Relative efficiency of different type of additives was found as
controversial based on resilient ratios.
Acknowledgements
A part of this research was supported by Karadeniz Technical
University Scientific Research Fund. We would like to thank to
Karadeniz Technical University Research Fund for giving us this
opportunity to realize this study.
References
[1] Gorkem C, Sengoz B. Predicting stripping and moisture induced damage of
asphalt concrete prepared with polymer modified bitumen and hydrated lime.
Constr Build Mater 2009;23(6):2227–36.
[2] Lavin PA. Comparison of liquid antistrip additives and hydrated lime using
AASHTO T-283. Construction chemicals technical director, ARR-MAZ products.
[3] Sengoz B, Agar E. Effect of asphalt film thickness on the moisture sensitivity
characteristics of hot mix asphalt of hot-mix asphalt. Build Environ
2007;42:3621–8.
[4] Buchanan MS, Smith BJ. Performance evaluation of hot-mix asphalt using
rotary loaded-wheel testing. Transp Res Rec: J Transp Res Board
2005;1929:157–64.
[5] Cross SA, Voth MD, Fager GA. Effects of sample preconditioning on asphalt
pavement analyzer wet rut depths. In: Mid-continent transportation
symposium proceedings; 2000. p. 20–3.
[6] Pan C, White TD. Evaluation of stripping for asphalt concrete mixtures using
accelerated testing methods. Transportation research record, 1630, paper no
98-0903. p. 98–105.
[7] Lu X, Isacsson U. Rheological characterization of styrene–butadiene–styrene
copolymer modified bitumens. J Constr Eng Build Mater 1997;11(1).
[8] Akzo Nobel. Safety data sheet. Wetfix BE. AU/EN; 2011.
[9] Aksoy A, Iskender E. Creep in conventional and modified asphalt mixtures. Proc
ICE Transp Thomas Telford J 2008;161(4):185–95.
[10] ASTM D4123. Indirect tension test for resilient modulus of bituminous
mixtures. University of New Mexico, Civil Engineering Department, Civil
Engineering Materials Laboratory, CE 305L; 23.08.2011. <http://
civilx.unm.edu/laboratories_ss/bituminous/tension.html>.
[11] Tayfur S, Ozen H, Aksoy A. Investigation of rutting performance of asphalt
mixtures containing polymer modifiers. Constr Build Mater
2007;21(2):328–37.
[12] Epps J. Asphalt pavement modifiers. Civil Eng ASCE 1986:57–9.
[13] Terrel RL, Walter JL. Modified asphalt pavement materials: the European
experience. Assoc Asphalt Pav Technol 1986;55:482–518.
[14] Carrick JA, Emery J, Fraser B, Hein D. Pavement performance and life-cycle cost
evaluation of a polymer modified asphalt cement. In: XIIIth IRF world meeting,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada; 1997.
[15] Zubeck H, Raad L, Saboundjian S, Minassian G. Performance of polymer-
modified asphalt–aggregate mixtures in Alaska. J Cold Reg Eng
2002;16(4):170–90.
[16] Sirin O, Kim HJ, Tia M, Choubane B. Comparison of rutting resistance of
unmodified and SBS-modified superpave mixtures by accelerated pavement
testing. Constr Build Mater 2008;22(3):286–94.
[17] Ozen H, Aksoy A, Tayfur S, Çelik F. Laboratory performance comparison of the
elastomer-modified asphalt mixtures. Build Environ 2008;43(7):1270–7.
[18] Yildirim Y. Polymer modified asphalt binders. Constr Build Mater
2007;21:66–72.
[19] Epps JE, Berger JN. In: Anagnos, moisture sensitivity of asphalt pavements: a
national seminar, California; 2003.
[20] Becker Y, Mendez MP, Rodriguez Y. Polymer modified asphalt. Wisconsin
Technol 1999;9(1):39–50.
[21] Kim YR, Lee HJ, Little DN. Fatigue characterization of asphalt concrete using
viscoelasticity and continuum damage mechanics. J AAPT 1997;66:520–49.
[22] Aksoy A, Samlioglu K, Tayfur S, Ozen H. Effects of various additives on the
moisture damage sensitivity of asphalt mixtures. Constr Build Mater
2005;19(1):11–8.
[23] Maupin GW. Effectiveness of anti-stripping in the field. Virginia
Transportation Research Council, VA 22903-0817 Charlottesville, Edgemont;
1995.
[24] Shaffie E. Stripping performance of hot mix asphalt (HMA) using polymer and
hydrated lime as additives. Universiti Teknologi Mara, degree of Master of
Science, Faculty of Civil Engineering; February 2008.